The Battlefield Blog has the overnight showing of Battlefield 3 on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon. This is the console debut of the first-person shooter sequel, as they play the PlayStation 3 edition. That is actually the newest aspect of the clip, as the gameplay is set on the same level as previous footage from the game. DICE's Johan Andersson tweets a response to a comment about the visuals: "why would anyone expect that console would look the same as PC? if that was the case we would have failed with the PC version."

loomy wrote on Jun 18, 2011, 11:41:bf3 destruction still looks too over the top to me

I'm not going to deny that there's exaggeration involved in what we see. It doesn't look like they quite got it right to me, either, but then this is another one of those things where they stress authenticity, not realism. The ability is there, perhaps exaggerated some to make it look cool and thus be more enjoyable as part of a game.

I also wonder how much the destruction takes into account the material that's hit and the caliber of the rounds fired. Some of that may need to be simplified in the code to avoid slowing things down with 64 people firing away at all things destructable.

everyone wrote on Jun 18, 2011, 02:46:@TeddyI'm not saying destruction necessarily makes a game less strategic. Just that there didn't seem to be much strategy on display in the BC2 beta, beyond levelling the entire map until the enemy has no place to hide.

Part of that was people just messing around with the destruction and seeing what they can and can't blow up, as well as just pure enjoyment at the ability to do it. Another thing that affected it was that people had yet to adapt to the new mechanic, not yet understanding what it could mean.

Nowadays, it plays quite a bit differently, and you see a lot of very cool things happening as a result of the destruction (speaking in terms of tactical decisions made, not just 'wow that exploded!'). It becomes especially relevant, I found in the rush modes. I tended to play squad rush more often than not, and the ability to open up new routes to the bomb, or expose people defending it by blowing a hole in the wall with an RPG or grenade launcher really made it play differently than the usual bomb modes from say CoD where you ended up with heavy choke points at doorways and halls near the bomb location.

In standard games, defenders generally have a clear advantage on bomb style maps. With destruction added, I felt it was much more balanced and felt like more of an active game when on defense since you couldn't just settle in a corner with your aim on a doorway.

I AM in Law Enforcement, and I sit in a car 12 hours a day. I wouldn't be caught behind a car door any day of the week in a firefight. You go ahead - we will be going to your funeral.

If you aren't behind the engine block - you are a dead man. And don't stand RIGHT NEXT to the car, stand back about 10 feet behind the engine block with the vehicle between you and the bad guy. Bullets skip off of the hood...right into your head. when you stick your noggin up and rest your gun on the hood....not good. If you are back a way, then the go over your head.

Little hints to keep you alive in a fire fight.

Almost everything in the market goes through a car door. It is just 2 very thin peices of metal (if you are lucky) and some foam...MAYBE. Even .22 rounds go through doors.

Very cool post. I would say if anything, cover is more important than ever, but obviously, as much cover as possible. These days it would probably be more about concealing your exact location from whoever is shooting you than about getting things between you and their bullets, because it does seem like they'll go through almost anything these days.

@TeddyI'm not saying destruction necessarily makes a game less strategic. Just that there didn't seem to be much strategy on display in the BC2 beta, beyond levelling the entire map until the enemy has no place to hide.BF3 may be better, it just didn't look it based on that video. If there's a decent mix of destructible and non-destructible scenery, though, I'm sure it will be fine.

xXBatmanXx wrote on Jun 18, 2011, 00:40:ummm...you DO REALISE that you are complaining about something that is readily available in your beloved MW games?

I don't know who told you I like MW, but you were lied to.

xXBatmanXx wrote on Jun 18, 2011, 00:40:The BFBC2 destrcution isn't on everything, it is only certain buildings that come down - but you woudln't know that - because, well, you have never played it, so you have SUCH an informed decision....but whatever.

As I said, I'm basing that on my time playing the beta. It may have just been that one map, and I'd be more than happy to be proven wrong by BF3.

On the subject of bullet penetration, and for those that decided to bring up realism when I was talking game balance.This video would suggest to me that you can't obliterate a wall with a single 5.56 round:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrkelVEAH3IBut what does real life know, eh? D:

I AM in Law Enforcement, and I sit in a car 12 hours a day. I wouldn't be caught behind a car door any day of the week in a firefight. You go ahead - we will be going to your funeral.

If you aren't behind the engine block - you are a dead man. And don't stand RIGHT NEXT to the car, stand back about 10 feet behind the engine block with the vehicle between you and the bad guy. Bullets skip off of the hood...right into your head. when you stick your noggin up and rest your gun on the hood....not good. If you are back a way, then the go over your head.

Little hints to keep you alive in a fire fight.

Almost everything in the market goes through a car door. It is just 2 very thin peices of metal (if you are lucky) and some foam...MAYBE. Even .22 rounds go through doors.

everyone wrote on Jun 17, 2011, 20:31:Not liking the way his rifle chewed through those concrete walls. I hope that's been exaggerated for SP.The OTT destruction was one of the reasons I didn't buy BC2. It just removes all strategy from a firefight when you can shoot straight through any cover.Still, as long as they don't fuck up my helis...

ummm...you DO REALISE that you are complaining about something that is readily available in your beloved MW games? You can chew through damn near ANY wall/surface in MW. There is really no where to hide.

The BFBC2 destrcution isn't on everything, it is only certain buildings that come down - but you woudln't know that - because, well, you have never played it, so you have SUCH an informed decision....but whatever.

Jerykk wrote on Jun 17, 2011, 20:56:As much as I hate to say it, that's not going to happen. The console market is simply too big for publishers to ignore. Sure, a big-budget, high-profile PC exclusive might sell a few million copies but that's not enough these days. CoD sells 10+ million each year and Epic is expecting GoW3 to sell over 6 million. Unless a big-budget game belongs to a genre that does poorly on consoles, like MMO or RTS, it will not be PC-exclusive. Slick graphics are all well and good but the popularity of consoles shows that consumers care more about convenience and accessibility than quality.

The real hope is that PC sales can reach a point where the lack of licensing costs and being able to sell directly to the consumer means the actual profit level on PC is comparable to consoles. From Dice's comments it sounds like Bad Company 2 pretty much hit that point already.

When that is the case a PC focus is more justifiable if developers want it, which Dice did.

Sorry to bust your bubble but bullets can really do that, think you can hide behind a car door? no way bub

To think, all the movies I've seen over the years where the cops are using their cars as shelter when they're being fired upon. I always figured their inevitable defeat was because they were going up against robots from the future or some other wonder, but I guess Wildone has other ideas.

I'm guessing you don't have a job in law enforcement or anything of that nature. You might think you're onto something, but I wouldn't consider giving up your day job just yet if I were you.

I'm having trouble figuring out what your point actually is from this post... Are you trying to suggest he's wrong?

Of course they use their cars as shelter, what other option is there? Stand in the street and try to dodge? Some concealment/cover is better than none. That said, most know that if you're going to use a car as cover, you get behind the engine block. Anything else is just concealment and won't stop a round from hitting you unless you get lucky and it deflects away. Even just as concealment, in a situation where ammunition is limited, the 'bad guys' aren't going to fire very many rounds blindly into the car just hoping to hit someone, lest they end up out of ammo. In that way, concealment becomes nearly as effective.

If you're trying to suggest that he's wrong, then take a look at that "box o truth" site someone linked to. Here, more specifically:

That's one 7.62mm round that went through 12 boards of sheetrock, 1 jug of water, an inch thick board of hardwood and STILL shattered the brick behind all of them. One round. Out of 20-30 you could fire fully automatic. They can very much chew holes through walls quite rapidly.

Wildone wrote on Jun 17, 2011, 20:41:Sorry to bust your bubble but bullets can really do that, think you can hide behind a car door? no way bub

I never mentioned realism and I never mentioned car doors, but thanks for the entirely irrelevant input.

Suddenly_Dead wrote on Jun 17, 2011, 20:58:It's also fun as hell. Destruction and adapting to it is part of the strategy.

Being able to just shoot someone you would have had to flush out with a grenade or try to flank in BF2, is not more strategical.I don't consider making the game more spammy and brainless to be conducive to 'fun times', either.

Calling it brainless is being pretty naive. You're only looking at it from one side. KNOWING that the walls can be torn away from right in front of you requires the one hiding to plan better, rather than running and hiding within an enclosed building.

Many buildings also have alternate exits, it's a rarity to see buildings with only one way in and one way out. Barring that, to escape, he could just blow a hole in the far wall behind him and pop out from behind the building to ambush the people who expected him to be inside. Or he could position himself so that he can get behind entire buildings as opposed to single walls.

As for the concept of strategy. Strategy is built on options. If the only options you have are to stand outside the building waiting for him to try and get out, try to run in, or throw a grenade inside. That's just 3 different tactics. Your opponent on the other hand is left with 2, hide or run out.

When you can destroy the walls as well, you have all 3 of those options, plus the option to fire blindly into the wall hoping to hit your opponent. Failing to do so, generally means your death as you're desperately trying to reload while your opponent pops out to kill you. You can alternately use some form of explosive to put a hole in one of the walls, hoping to expose or possibly kill your opponent. Failing to do so means he now has two locations to return fire from or attempt an escape, or worse, he was waiting for that and lobs a grenade out just as you take the wall down and you're left either dead or scrambling for cover while he escapes from the building.

Destruction doesn't in the LEAST make combat less strategic. Quite the contrary, it allows for more. If you're looking for simple, clean cut strategy then no doubt you'll hate it. This is much messier, more chaotic and requires you to think more, since there are more possible actions to anticipate from your opponent.

Sorry to bust your bubble but bullets can really do that, think you can hide behind a car door? no way bub

To think, all the movies I've seen over the years where the cops are using their cars as shelter when they're being fired upon. I always figured their inevitable defeat was because they were going up against robots from the future or some other wonder, but I guess Wildone has other ideas.

I'm guessing you don't have a job in law enforcement or anything of that nature. You might think you're onto something, but I wouldn't consider giving up your day job just yet if I were you.

Wildone wrote on Jun 17, 2011, 20:41:Sorry to bust your bubble but bullets can really do that, think you can hide behind a car door? no way bub

I never mentioned realism and I never mentioned car doors, but thanks for the entirely irrelevant input.

Suddenly_Dead wrote on Jun 17, 2011, 20:58:It's also fun as hell. Destruction and adapting to it is part of the strategy.

Being able to just shoot someone you would have had to flush out with a grenade or try to flank in BF2, is not more strategical.I don't consider making the game more spammy and brainless to be conducive to 'fun times', either.

In my humble opinion, going from that tweet, and the stir in the PC gaming forums, I can see BF3, if done right, being the one game that truly gives a re-birth to PC exclusives. My hope, My dream.

As much as I hate to say it, that's not going to happen. The console market is simply too big for publishers to ignore. Sure, a big-budget, high-profile PC exclusive might sell a few million copies but that's not enough these days. CoD sells 10+ million each year and Epic is expecting GoW3 to sell over 6 million. Unless a big-budget game belongs to a genre that does poorly on consoles, like MMO or RTS, it will not be PC-exclusive. Slick graphics are all well and good but the popularity of consoles shows that consumers care more about convenience and accessibility than quality.

Not liking the way his rifle chewed through those concrete walls. I hope that's been exaggerated for SP.The OTT destruction was one of the reasons I didn't buy BC2. It just removes all strategy from a firefight when you can shoot straight through any cover.Still, as long as they don't fuck up my helis...

Even though I have sorta made up my mind to pick MW3 over BF3 when they're both released, DICE's frostbite engine is extremly impressive when compared to what MW3 is still using. I'm not even going to try to dispute that. It's not so much that MW3 doesn't still look good, just that next to it, BF3 looks positively next-gen. It raises the bar.

StingingVelvet wrote on Jun 17, 2011, 16:28:It looks a lot worse in comparison than I thought it would, honestly. I assumed they had some trick that would make them largely indistinguishable. Can't get blood from a stone and all that though I guess.

In any case the larger maps and 64 players are the real reasons to go PC.